İlhan BAHŞİ, Mustafa ORHAN, İrfan KÜÇÜKOĞLU

Morphometric and Morphological Evaluation of the Atlas: Anatomic Study and Clinical Implications

Objective: Atlas is located at a critical point close to the vital centers of the medulla oblongata, which can be compressed by the dislocation of the atlantoaxial complex or instability of the atlantooccipital joint. This study aimed to determine in detail the morphometric and morphological characteristics of the atlas to guide the reduction of the risk of complications and increase the success rate in various surgical approaches for the craniovertebral junction. Methods: In this study, 17 atlas vertebrae whose measurement parameters were pronounced and unknown gender, age, and ethnic characteristics were examined. Results: Totally 16 parameters, 11 of which were bilateral and 5 were unilateral, were examined on the atlas. Also, no accessory foramen transversarium was found in these atlas vertebrae. Of the 23 foramina transversaria that were prominent and not broken, 7 were found to be round-shaped (30.43%), and 16 were oval-shaped (69.57%). Conclusion: It is deducted that the results obtained in this study will help to have information about the morphometry and morphology of atlas vertebrae. Although information such as age, gender, and ethnic origin is not known about the bones evaluated, it is the advantage of this study that a large number of parameters are evaluated and compared with previous publications. Nevertheless, it seems that there is a need for studies in which much more cases are assessed, and information such as age, gender, and ethnic origin is known.

PDF

___

1. Naderi S, Cakmakçi H, Acar F, Arman C, Mertol T, Arda MN. Anatomical and computed tomographic analysis of C1 vertebra. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2003;105(4):245-248. [CrossRef]
2. Chen YF, Liu HM. Imaging of craniovertebral junction. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2009;19(3):483-510. [CrossRef]
3. Tanrisever S, Orhan M, Bahşi İ, Yalçin ED. Anatomical evaluation of the craniovertebral junction on cone-beam computed tomography images. Surg Radiol Anat. 2020;42(7):797-815. [CrossRef]
4. Şengül G, Kadıoğlu HH. Morphometric anatomy of the atlas and axis vertebrae. Turk Neurosurg. 2006;16(2):69-76.
5. Cacciola F, Phalke U, Goel A. Vertebral artery in relationship to C1-C2 vertebrae: an anatomical study. Neurol India. 2004;52(2):178-184.
6. Akhtar M, Madhukar P, Rahman S, Kashyap N. A morphometric study of foramen transversarium of dried cervical vertebrae. Int J Res Med Sci. 2015;3(4):912-916. [CrossRef]
7. Gosavi SN, Vatsalaswamy P. Morphometric study of the atlas vertebra using manual method. Malays Orthop J. 2012;6(3):18-20. [CrossRef]
8. Doherty BJ, Heggeness MH. Quantitative anatomy of the second cervical vertebra. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995;20(5):513-517. [CrossRef]
9. Koller H, Robinson Y. Cervical Spine Surgery: Standard and Advanced Techniques. Berlin: Springer; 2019.
10. Miller RM, Ebraheim NA, Xu R, Yeasting RA. Anatomic consideration of transpedicular screw placement in the cervical spine. An analysis of two approaches. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(20):2317-2322. [CrossRef]
11. Yukawa Y. Pedicle screw fixation in cervical spine. In: Koller H, Robinson Y, eds. Cervical Spine Surgery: Standard and Advanced Techniques. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019:449-454.
12. Panjabi MM, Shin EK, Chen NC, Wang JL. Internal morphology of human cervical pedicles. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(10):1197- 1205. [CrossRef]
13. Yukawa Y, Kato F, Ito K, et al. Placement and complications of cervical pedicle screws in 144 cervical trauma patients using pedicle axis view techniques by fluoroscope. Eur Spine J. 2009;18(9):1293-1299. [CrossRef]
14. Sanchis-Gimeno JA, Llido S, Perez-Bermejo M, Nalla S. Prevalence of anatomic variations of the atlas vertebra. Spine J. 2018;18(11):2102- 2111. [CrossRef]
15. Kaur J, Kaur K, Singh P, Kumar A. Morphometric study of axis vertebra in subjects of Indian origin. IJMDS. 2018;7(1):1615-1620. [CrossRef]
16. Jasveen K, Harsimran G, Poonam S, Ajay K. Morphometric study of the articular facets of atlas and axis vertebrae. UJMDS. 2014;2(02): 83-89.
17. Karau Bundi P, Ogeng´o JA, Hassanali J, Odula PO. Morphometry and variations of bony ponticles of the atlas vertebrae (C1) in Kenyans. Int J Morphol. 2010;28(4):1019-1024. [CrossRef]
18. Lalit M, Kullar JS, Piplani S, Kullar G, Sharma T. Anatomical observations including morphometric pattern of foramina Transversaria of atlas vertebrae in North Indians. Eur J Anat. 2015;19(3):249-255.
19. Rocha R, Safavi-Abbasi S, Reis C, et al. Working area, safety zones, and angles of approach for posterior C-1 lateral mass screw placement: a quantitative anatomical and morphometric evaluation. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;6(3):247-254. [CrossRef]
20. Sethi M, Vasudeva N, Mishra S. Study of foramen transversaria of first cervical vertebrae and its variations. OA Anat. 2014;2(3):25.
21. Taitz C, Nathan H, Arensburg B. Anatomical observations of the foramina Transversaria. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1978;41(2):170- 176. [CrossRef]
22. Tun MK. Transoral Yaklaşımda Dens Axis ile Arteria Vertebralis İlişkisi ve Atlas’ın Anatomik Önemi; Doktora tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, 2007.
23. Bahsi I. An anatomic study of the supratrochlear foramen of the humerus and review of the literature. Eur J Ther. 2019;25(4):295-303. [CrossRef]
24. Wang Y, Yang M, Zhang H, Zheng Y, Tian Y, Li Y. Exploring the safety range via the transoral approach to the craniovertebral junction. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25(4):1473-1475. [CrossRef]
25. Steel H. Anatomical and mechanical considerations of the atlantoaxial articulations. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1968;50:1481-1482.